MANDATE FOR CHANGE a bold agenda for the incoming government Jeanne Allen * Kevin P. Chavous * John M. Engler * Richard Whitmire * Juan Williams * Edited by Samuel Casey Carter Mandate for Change a bold agenda for the incoming government Introduction Samuel Casey Carter Federal Accountability Juan Williams Transparency Honorable John M. Engler Charter Schools Honorable Kevin P. Chavous School Choice Jeanne Allen Teacher Quality Richard Whitmire The Center for Education Reform Washington, D.C. January 2009 federal aCCountabIlIty t the start of the Obama Administration, the federal government’s role in demanding accountability from schools, principals, and teachers is a lot like the theatrical, even comic, blustering old man behind the curtain—the Wizard of Oz. Just like the Wizard, the U.S. Department of Education’s efforts to insist on accountability from state and local school officials generate lots of thunder and fury in the form of headlines and conferences about the poor performance of U.S. students. And just like the Wizard in the story, the big noise is intended to divert us from the truth. The truth is that the tired old man behind the curtain knows that the image of his power is far greater than its reality—and so does the federal government. A The federal role in education This has been the story since President Carter—fulfilling a campaign promise to one faction of the teachers’ unions—created a separate Department of Education in 1979 in the name of sounding an alarm over troubled schools, but also to get an infusion of federal money into teacher paychecks. President Reagan used the same strategy of fury, angst, and crisis in calling attention to “A Nation at Risk,” the 1983 report on the failings of U.S. schools. The report used charged language to describe America’s schools, saying the nation was threatened with a “rising tide of mediocrity” and there had been a steady decline in standardized test scores since 1963. There were proposals for longer school days, and requirements for increased study of English, math, science, and foreign languages. But the report was careful to say it was up to state and local officials to handle the problem and that the federal government’s only role in fixing the problem was simply to “identify the national interest in education.” federal aCCountabIlIty Juan wIllIaMS 7 tranSparenCy T o start the day at a typical manufacturing plant, a manager will seek updates on inventory, check whether shipments are on schedule, and inquire about the status of equipment. Questions about personnel also are a must. In a big, nationwide company, the executive might ask, “How are we staffed in Arizona? Are they back at full strength in New Jersey?” In a small outfit, the manager’s question might be the simple, “Is everyone Manufacturers here?” Consider the reaction if the response comes back, “Gee, I don’t know.” Yet that’s essentially the answer parents and the public get if they inquire how many children came to school today. It’s the response an educational official hears if asking for a real-time, district-by-district report on attendance. . . or test scores. live and die by the credo, to measure is to improve. The same should be true with education. For parents, for educators, and for taxpayers, “Gee, I don’t know,” is not an acceptable answer. And to manufacturers whose competitive survival depends on accurate, up-to-date information, it’s baffling. Let the data speak If we can track inventories of billions of inanimate objects around the world in real-time, surely we can manage the attendance of our children at school. If we can verify the quality of a product every step of the way as it moves along the manufacturing process, the education of our children deserves the same careful attention. tranSparenCy John M. engler 13 Charter SChoolS he winds of change are blowing as it relates to education in this country. National opinion polling, focus group studies, and the proverbial word on the street suggest that everyday people are sick and tired of the growing deficits they see in the children who are being educated in our traditional public schools. Folks are no longer accepting of the status quo—nor should they be. The status quo is frightening and the statistics don’t lie. T One size does not fit all According to the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), our children just aren’t doing as well as they should be doing in our schools. For example, in both math and reading, approximately 30 percent of the nation’s school children test at or above the proficient level. What’s worse, roughly 12 percent of African-American and 15 percent of Hispanic 8th graders are testing at or above the proficient level. The achievement gap between white kids and most children of color is downright scary. According to Given Half a Chance—The Schott Foundation’s 50 State Report on Public Education and Black Males, only 47 percent of AfricanAmerican males in high school graduate, compared to 75 percent of their white male counterparts. More alarmingly, as the Schott Report reveals, a growing number of the largest school districts are showing AfricanAmerican male graduation rates of less than 40 percent. Across the country, the numbers are grim: Minneapolis, MN Cincinnati, OH Orange County, CA Memphis, TN St. Louis, MO Dade County, FL Cleveland, Ohio Charter SChoolS 38% 38% 37% 35% 35% 34% 34% New York, NY Milwaukee, WI Buffalo, NY Baltimore, MD Detroit, MI Indianapolis, IN 32% 32% 31% 31% 20% 19% KevIn p ChavouS . 19 teaCher QualIty I f you want to check on the country’s pocketbook anxieties, you consult the consumer confidence index. If you want to monitor the marital yearnings of the privileged, you sift through the Sunday New York Times weddings. And if you need to take the temperature of the American dream, you call up Charles B. Reed. Don’t know Charlie? You should. He’s the chancellor of California State University, the nation’s largest four-year state university system with 450,000 students on 23 campuses. These sons and daughters, many the first in their families to go to college, earned their admissions tickets by graduating in the top third of their high school classes. Among them: the next wave of hungry entrepreneurs we need to energize the economy. As go these students, so goes America. So it’s crucial to know this: Six in every ten of these students have to take remedial courses in math or English. There’s no ducking the crisis here. High school teachers may have awarded the students B averages, but they failed to teach them even the basics. Fixing the problem, as seen in California and other states, is what the education “reform” movement has been about. Reformers pushed states to set ambitious learning standards, and the states agreed. The reformers convinced school districts to crank up the rigor of the curriculum, and they did. Reformers demanded stiff accountability, and many states responded with high school graduation exams. Progress has been made. In states such as Massachusetts, which took the reform movement seriously, the gains have been significant. Still, a quick glance at any chart showing the declining education accomplishments of young Americans compared to our foreign competitors—students like those showing up at Cal State campuses—reveals that progress to date has fallen short. teaCher QualIty rIChard whItMIre 35